Circumcision

[Tishri1]

Well scritpure does record the circumcizing of adult men at the explicit command of Adonai -

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]


In other discussions I have heard of Egypt being described as "sin" and the "promised land" as redemption (or heaven). In the above story we see that they were required to become phyically circumcised after crossing over the Jordon.
[/FONT]

Here is a question I have always wondered about: Were they Circumcising in the wilderness? I cant seem to remember if they were...and all the children born during that time that had to be circumcised before entering the promised land seems to make me wonder that too?

 

[Yovel]

Tish,

Y'hoshua 5:7 So he raised up their children to take their place, and it was these whom Y'hoshua circumcised; till then they had been uncircumcised, because they had not been circumcised while traveling.

The above verse says they had not been circumised while traveling.

 

[Tishri1]

yeh what does that mean....all of them from the beginning of their wanderings or just recently, like their last bit of travel.

 

[Yovel]

All the men that came out of Eygpt had been circumsied;

Jos 5:5-7; 5 For all the people who came out were circumcised; but all the people who were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, they had not circumcised. 6 For the children of Yisra'el walked forty years in the wilderness, until all the nation, even the men of war who came forth out of Egypt, were consumed, because they didn't listen to the voice of the LORD: to whom the LORD swore that he wouldn't let them see the land which the LORD swore to their fathers that he would give us, a land flowing with milk and honey. 7 Their children, whom he raised up in their place, them did Yehoshua circumcise: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.

Moshe was told by Adonai to take a census of all the men twenty years and upward.

Num 1:2 "Take a census of all the congregation of the children of Yisra'el, by their families, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of the names, every male, one by one;
3 from twenty years old and upward, all who are able to go out to war in Yisra'el.

This census was taken before Moses sent the spys into the promised land. Because they brought back a bad report (expect for Y'hoshua and Kelev) they were told they would die in the wilderness.

Num 14:28 Tell them, As I live, says the LORD, surely as you have spoken in my ears, so will I do to you: 29 your dead bodies shall fall in this wilderness; and all who were numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, who have murmured against me, 30 surely you shall not come into the land, concerning which I swore that I would make you dwell therein, save Kalev the son of Yefunneh, and Yehoshua the son of Nun. 31 But your little ones, that you said should be a prey, them will I bring in, and they shall know the land which you have rejected. 32 But as for you, your dead bodies shall fall in this wilderness.

So there was probably a group of youngsters aged 1-19 that were circumsised and went through the wilderness for forty years and were able to go into the promised land with Y'hoshua as thier leader. I will call this group of males Aleph.

Now the group of males that were born after this I will call Bet.

So from the first Quote above, group Aleph was already circumcised. It was all those from group Bet that were born during the time of wondering in the wilderness that had to be circumcised.

 

[Tishri1]

All the men that came out of Eygpt had been circumsied;



Moshe was told by Adonai to take a census of all the men twenty years and upward.



This census was taken before Moses sent the spys into the promised land. Because they brought back a bad report (expect for Y'hoshua and Kelev) they were told they would die in the wilderness.



So there was probably a group of youngsters aged 1-19 that were circumsised and went through the wilderness for forty years and were able to go into the promised land with Y'hoshua as thier leader. I will call this group of males Aleph.

Now the group of males that were born after this I will call Bet.

So from the first Quote above, group Aleph was already circumcised. It was all those from group Bet that were born during the time of wondering in the wilderness that had to be circumcised.

exactly what I thought! Thanks Yovel

Now my next and obvious question

why were they not circumcised before? if it was commanded to do this why were they not circ*ed when they were each born(8th day)?

and is this a clue to Paul's words?

and is this a clue to our present day and future kingdom with Yeshua?

 

[plum]

Matty, my brother ... can you help me understand something?

my comments in black

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Exodus (Sh'mot) 12:43-49[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 43 ADONAI said to Moshe and Aharon, "This is the regulation for the Pesach lamb: no foreigner is to eat it.44 But if anyone has a slave he bought for money, when you have circumcised him, he may eat it. [doesn't this indicate a male older than 8 days?] 45 Neither a traveler nor a hired servant may eat it. 46 It is to be eaten in one house. You are not to take any of the meat outside the house, and you are not to break any of its bones. 47 The whole community of Isra'el is to keep it. 48 If a foreigner staying with you wants to observe ADONAI's Pesach, all his males must be circumcised.[does this mean his 8 day old children? his male household? what about himself? It doesn't meantion HIM getting circumcised, and that confuses me because of the next part...] Then he [?]may take part and observe it; he will be like a citizen of the land. [so this means he must join himself to all Israel and be subject to all of Torah, correct?] But no uncircumcised person is to eat it. 49 The same teaching is to apply equally to the citizen and to the foreigner living among you."[/FONT]

if anyone has thoughts on this... i guess I just didn't glean my answer from the posts above... but i admit, i did do a touch of skimming so forgive me if it has been said....

 

[MattyJames]

Matty, my brother ... can you help me understand something?

my comments in black


Quote[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Exodus (Sh'mot) 12:43-49[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 43 ADONAI said to Moshe and Aharon, "This is the regulation for the Pesach lamb: no foreigner is to eat it.44 But if anyone has a slave he bought for money, when you have circumcised him, he may eat it. [doesn't this indicate a male older than 8 days?] 45 Neither a traveler nor a hired servant may eat it. 46 It is to be eaten in one house. You are not to take any of the meat outside the house, and you are not to break any of its bones. 47 The whole community of Isra'el is to keep it. 48 If a foreigner staying with you wants to observe ADONAI's Pesach, all his males must be circumcised.[does this mean his 8 day old children? his male household? what about himself? It doesn't meantion HIM getting circumcised, and that confuses me because of the next part...] Then he [?]may take part and observe it; he will be like a citizen of the land. [so this means he must join himself to all Israel and be subject to all of Torah, correct?] (Emphasis mine, MJ) But no uncircumcised person is to eat it. 49 The same teaching is to apply equally to the citizen and to the foreigner living among you."[/FONT]


if anyone has thoughts on this... i guess I just didn't glean my answer from the posts above... but i admit, i did do a touch of skimming so forgive me if it has been said....[/FONT]
.

Greetings MJ,

I copied your post and bolded part of it. What you state (in the bolded section) is exactly what I am saying. When we read,

"44 But if anyone has a slave he bought for money, when you have circumcised him, he may eat it. [doesn't this indicate a male older than 8 days?] "

we automatically assume "circumcision of the flesh" is applied. What I am suggesting is that Adoni is talking about Spiritual Circumcision. In other words, "Remove him from his past culture, burn his Gods, take off his earings, remove all that attains to any culture other than that of Abraham.

I also apply this rendering to the verses below.

"48 If a foreigner staying with you wants to observe ADONAI's Pesach, all his males must be circumcised.[does this mean his 8 day old children? his male household? what about himself? It doesn't meantion HIM getting circumcised, and that confuses me because of the next part...] Then he [?]may take part and observe it; he will be like a citizen of the land. [so this means he must join himself to all Israel and be subject to all of Torah, correct?] (Emphasis mine, MJ)"

Once again, I apply "Spiritual Circumcision" to this passage. Yes, that may also mean that, in the time that he makes known that he wants to keep the Pesach, all Male children born are to be circumcised (in the flesh). And keep in mind, Gods definition of Circumcision is, "A man child of eight days old".

Consider the following verse. Gal 2:3 "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be Circumcised."

Here we have an uncircumcised man, Keeping Torah, which means the Observance of Pesach. IF then, Torah does require circumcision of the flesh, then Paul was teaching against Torah. Other wise, it is our interpretation of either Torah, or Paul that is wanting. And I percieve, that we can be certain that Paul was speaking of "Circumcision of the Flesh" in the passage I quoted above.

I do understand however, that Ex 12:45 , 48, reads as though Adoni is speaking of "Circumcision of the Flesh", but I find this interpretation in conflict with Pauls doctrine.

I hope I am explaining myself clearly enough. LOL

Thanks for the questions MJ, I do hope I have answered them enough. Keep them coming .

G-d Bless,

MattyJames

 

[Wags]

The phrase - circumcised heart is used in Torah - but NOT in this particular passage. So don't you think that if Adonai had meant "circumcised heart" that is what would have been written? When Joshua was commanded to circumcise all of Israel it mentions that they stayed in camp until they were healed (Joshua 5:8) so obviously that was a physical circumcision.

In my opinion it is rather backward to spirtualize a portion of Torah so that it will work with Paul's teaching. If Paul's teachings are at odds with torah then he is at odds with Yeshua too and we should ignore his teachings (or try to figure out what he really meant in light of torah commands).

 

[DanielRB]

Hi All,

I must admit that I haven't read all of this thread, so I may be repitious.

The Egyptians performed a type of circumcision, a cutting of the foreskin--but it was not a full removal of the foreskin. This might be the reason for the "circumcision again after crossing the Jordan--if the Israelites had adopted this custom rather than doing full circumcision.

In Messiah,

Daniel

 

[Yovel]

The phrase - circumcised heart is used in Torah - but NOT in this particular passage. So don't you think that if Adonai had meant "circumcised heart" that is what would have been written? When Joshua was commanded to circumcise all of Israel it mentions that they stayed in camp until they were healed (Joshua 5:8) so obviously that was a physical circumcision.

In my opinion it is rather backward to spirtualize a portion of Torah so that it will work with Paul's teaching. If Paul's teachings are at odds with torah then he is at odds with Yeshua too and we should ignore his teachings (or try to figure out what he really meant in light of torah commands).

I agree whole heartedly.

 

[Yovel]

Why is it when people read the Torah they either don't believe what it says or they want to spritualize it?

 

[Tishri1]

Why is it when people read the Torah they either don't believe what it says or they want to spritualize it?

well I think we are trying to understand based on Paul what is going on here....maybe he is simply saying NOT FOR SALVATION Period. Maybe yes get circumsised but not for salvation...could it be that simple

 

[Yovel]

well I think we are trying to understand based on Paul what is going on here....maybe he is simply saying NOT FOR SALVATION Period. Maybe yes get circumsised but not for salvation...could it be that simple

It could be that translating Hebrew thought to Greek and then to English just doesn't work.

 

[Espada]

It seems that Paul wanted Timothy to be circumcised because he was ethnically Jewish and actually pushed him to it (Acts 16 IIRC), on the other hand PAul did not put any pressure on Titus with him being of gentile stock (GAL 5). So it seems Paul regarded it as being an issue for the Jews but not for the gentiles. As for whether you should undertake it, pray to God about it, it shouldn't be a light decision - it is an uncomfortable procedure, pschologically and physically.

 

[Tishri1]

It could be that translating Hebrew thought to Greek and then to English just doesn't work.

exactly!

 

[Tishri1]

It seems that Paul wanted Timothy to be circumcised because he was ethnically Jewish and actually pushed him to it (Acts 16 IIRC), on the other hand PAul did not put any pressure on Titus with him being of gentile stock (GAL 5). So it seems Paul regarded it as being an issue for the Jews but not for the gentiles. As for whether you should undertake it, pray to God about it, it shouldn't be a light decision - it is an uncomfortable procedure, pschologically and physically.

That is an excellent point! So how do we combine that fact with the fact other's have brought up about not being able to partake of the Passover Seder unless one is circumcised?

 

[Espada]

That is an excellent point! So how do we combine that fact with the fact other's have brought up about not being able to partake of the Passover Seder unless one is circumcised?

I would suggest that this is much the same as the Lord's supper in its observance rules - in fact one is a foreshadow of the other (note I am not suggesting that one wipes out the other, that would be contrary to what I believe but the Lord's supper makes the seder complete). Nobody who is not a believer is to take part in the Lord's supper. Circumcision in Exodus would have played a similar role to modern day baptism as an outward sign of a person's devotion to God. If a foreigner wanted to come and celebrate a feast of G-d, they should first accept him and demonstrate a commitment to his ways.

In terms of Messianic celebrations, I would suggest that it would be circumcission of the heart which would be important here.

 

[Wags]

Unless there is a specific command by Yeshua that nulifies a portion of Torah (which there isn't - if He had taught against Torah then he would not be the messiah) then the commands in Torah are STILL applicable today to ALL beleivers regardless of their ethnicity.

I've said it once and I'll say it again - either you are a child (adopted or natural) of Abraham or you aren't. If you are, then all the rights and responsibilities that go along with belonging to the family are part of the deal. You don't get to pick and choose what parts of the family rules you want to keep.

 

[jgonz]

You don't get to pick and choose what parts of the family rules you want to keep.

Excellent reminder.

 

[MattyJames]

The phrase - circumcised heart is used in Torah - but NOT in this particular passage. So don't you think that if Adonai had meant "circumcised heart" that is what would have been written? When Joshua was commanded to circumcise all of Israel it mentions that they stayed in camp until they were healed (Joshua 5:8) so obviously that was a physical circumcision.

In my opinion it is rather backward to spirtualize a portion of Torah so that it will work with Paul's teaching. If Paul's teachings are at odds with torah then he is at odds with Yeshua too and we should ignore his teachings (or try to figure out what he really meant in light of torah commands).

I've been really busy with work of Late, so I've been out of the discussion for a while .

I understand your argument Wags, and it is hard to argue against. But I must also add that I'm stating this Belief of "Cir* before Pesach", brings Torah in contradiction to itself. In Genesis it only talks about Males, Born in the land, of eight days old.

But here in Ex it (We assume) talks about full grown Males, who were not born in the Land. It seems to be a contradiction. The original rules state thus, but this states otherwise.

We must also realize the implications of our disscussion. If we can only keep ALL of Torah by Circumcision of the Flesh, then Salvation requires all new Male believers to be Circumcised.

If this is so, then we must disreguard Paul as an Apostle of Yeshua. His ministry clearly teaches that Cir* of a Full Grown gentile Male is not required for the Keeping of the Faith, thus the Observance of Torah.

As for Joshua's Testimony in Ch 5, it clearly explains the reasons for the Circumcision of the Men of Israel. Because they had disobeyed the Comandment in respect of the Covenant with their G-d. This is rather irrelevent when disscusing the responsibilities of Gentile Men toward Circumcision.

It is for these reasons that I have to understand Ex 12:45-48 relates specifically to a cutting off of a Strangers former self, ways, culture, gods, dress, etc (as we are also required to do!) and to take on the ways of Adonai; Pesach providing the Propitiation of redemption back to Adonai just as today the Blood of Messiah provides the same Propitiation, to become "One born in the Land" and to inherit the same promises of Abraham.

Futhermore there is no where else in all of Scripture, both OT and NT, that we can find the upholding of Gentile Circumcision (Of a full grown male) with which to add support to the agrument. Whereas we see in Pauls rendition of scripture that circumcision of the Flesh is not required which only adds weight to the Interpretation I am putting forward. I prefer to err on the side of caution.

Just some more thoughts.

Shabbat Shalom to all,

MattyJames